jpimprapperfandomcom-20200214-history
Fandom:Bots/Requests for approval/WikiCleanerBot 9
WikiCleanerBot 9 :The following discussion is an archived debate. '''Please do not modify it.' To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.'' The result of the discussion was WikiCleanerBot 9 Operator: Time filed: 14:03, Monday, June 24, 2019 (UTC) Function overview: Do edits for fixing (Title linked in text) in some simple situations. Automatic, Supervised, or Manual: Automatic Programming language(s): Java (WPCleaner) Source code available: On GitHub (especially algorithm 48) Links to relevant discussions (where appropriate): Edit period(s): Twice a month Estimated number of pages affected: For the first run a few hundreds (a dry run on the 5719 articles listed in Fandom:CHECKWIKI/WPC 048 dump showed modifications on 231 articles), then probably a few dozens at most on each run. Namespace(s): Main Exclusion compliant (Yes/No):''' Yes '''Function details: The bot will fix simple situations for error . Currently, it will only replace Title by Title before the first title (for example, on 1505 Lo Mustang earthquake, it will replace 1505 Lo Mustang earthquake by 1505 Lo Mustang earthquake). If I find other situations that I could fix automatically, I will add it later. As it will do cosmetics edits with the current code, I'm modifying the request to be considered as cosmetic edits, performed only with other non-cosmetic edits. Discussion So , this will skip pages such as 1931 Ogmore by-election or 1930–31 Ottawa Senators season because the links are not in-source bolded? Primefac (talk) 20:28, 27 June 2019 (UTC) : Yes, it will skip them for several reasons: not in-source bolded, not before the first title. Event if I improve the algorithm for fixing other cases, I don't see anything automatic for the 2 articles you mention because the title is not even in-source bolded in another place in the article: if the title was already bolded before and before the first title, maybe we could think of unbolding it, but I don't know enough the usages in enwiki to do this (there may be reasons to have the title in bold several times in the article). --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 20:51, 27 June 2019 (UTC) ::Okay, second question, which really should have been the first: how is fixing this error (in the context you've defined) not considered a cosmetic edit? The visual output of the page does not change (it stays bold), unlike if you had removed it in running/"normal" text. Primefac (talk) 13:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC) :::Okay. Then, can this request be considered for cosmetic edits, only performed with other non-cosmetic edits? --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 08:37, 30 June 2019 (UTC) :::: only a portion of would be cosmetic. If you find Foobar later in the article, then it de-bolds it. For those in the lead (which is what this proposed task is), it's cosmetic, although there is an argument to consider it editor hostile. Maybe hostile enough to warrant a deviation from WP:COSMETICBOT (most people would not expect a link markup to generate boldness), maybe not. As a side-task, there's no real issue with it though. Headbomb {t · · p · b} 00:44, 3 July 2019 (UTC) :I'm modifying the request to be considered as cosmetic edits, performed only with other non-cosmetic edits. If at some point, I enhance my code to deal with other cases, including non-cosmetic ones, I will open a new BRFA. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 11:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC) * , please post the permanent link to the page of the bot's contribs with these edits. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Thanks! --TheSandDoctor Talk 03:29, 6 August 2019 (UTC): amended per the below 22:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC) *:Thanks TheSandDoctor. For me, it seems that 50 edits is a lot for this kind of task (estimated number of edits was around 200 when I first submitted this task: since then it's considered as cosmetic edit, so it will be a lot less, or manually to find among the 200+ articles ones where there's another non-cosmetic edit to do). Any way of reducing this number? *:# First edit, only completely automatic edit, fixed with other errors my bot is approved to do. *:# Al-Furgan: #48 fixed automatically, reference before punctuation fixed manually. *:# AVM Productions: first #48 fixed automatically, second one fixed manually, and manual copy edit. *:# Brooklin Redman: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:# Chamma Chamma: first #48 fixed automatically, second fixed manually. *:# Congolese franc: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:# Ekhatha: first #48 fixed automatically, second one fixed manually, and manual copy edit. *:# Effects of human sexual promiscuity: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:# Ghazial: first #48 fixed automatically, second one fixed manually. *:# Geiger Key: first #48 fixed automatically, second one fixed manually. *:# Free indirect speech: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:# Flathead motorcycles: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:# Global Academy of Technology: first #48 fixed automatically, second ones fixed manually. *:# Joseph 0. Legaspi: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:# Katarzyna Kolodziejska: #48 fixed automatically, other edits done manually. *:I will post edits progressively. --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 21:43, 6 August 2019 (UTC) *::Hi . I think I saw 5700+ and that is why I wrote 50. In that case, how does 10-20 sound? If it works for you, I’ll amend the above. —TheSandDoctor Talk 21:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC) *::: Thanks TheSandDoctor. Yes, 10-20 sounds a lot better . --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:00, 6 August 2019 (UTC) *::::Done, . Otherwise, instructions stand. Take as much time as you need . —TheSandDoctor Talk 22:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC) :::::: Thanks TheSandDoctor. Easily done with 15 . --NicoV (Talk on frwiki) 22:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC) * As long as this doesn't run by itself (mostly-breaking COSMETIC) then I see no issues. Primefac (talk) 22:11, 7 August 2019 (UTC) :The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. '''Please do not modify it.' To request review of this BRFA, please start a new section at WT:BRFA.''